As the sword of justice hangs over Donald Trump’s head for several alleged crimes, including instigating the Jan. 6 insurrection, it ultimately comes down to payments to buy silence. which led to the first filing of charges against him. It comes as no surprise to University of Ottawa law professor Carissima Mathen: The Trump Organization has long been in the crosshairs of the Manhattan Attorney General’s Office, which says it wants to fight white-collar criminals to protect reputation as the busiest business city in the United States.
This is also how the District Attorney of Manhattan, Alvin Bragg, notably justified the filing of the charges, shortly after having read the indictment in the courtroom.
“The accuracy and veracity of business records is important everywhere, of course, but it is even more so in Manhattan, the financial center of the world. That’s why we have a reputation for vigorously pursuing white-collar crime,” he insisted to reporters, possibly to nip accusations of partisan politics in the bud. “This is one criminal prosecution among others,” he added.
The former American president faces 34 counts, one per “commercial register” having been falsified, in contravention of electoral laws, among other things.
The purpose of this embezzlement? Covering up — away from the eyes of voters — damaging information about the then-presidential candidate before and after the 2016 election, the indictment says.
But even more, Mr. Trump is accused of employing a real “system” to identify, buy and bury negative information about him in order to improve his chances of winning. Then, he hid this conduct.
It was already known that the payment of $130,000 made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels was at the heart of this affair. But the document detailing the indictment says payments were made to two other people: a former doorman at the Trump Tower in New York ($30,000) and a woman who alleges she had sex with Trump ($150,000 ).
A taste of partisanship?
The president is currently the target of several investigations: in addition to the Capitol uprising of January 6, 2020, there is also the one for having attempted to interfere in the 2020 presidential election in the state of Georgia and for having illegally detained secret documents that could compromise the security of the United States.
The fact that this case is the first to be the subject of criminal charges, while other investigations are looking into crimes perceived as more serious, seems to demonstrate that there is no concerted strategy between the various offices of the prosecutors who are investigating the former Republican president, commented Professor Mathen.
“They operate independently and that’s the attitude to adopt,” she continues. I’m not saying that politics didn’t play a role, that would be naïve. But this is not the main engine. »
As for this belief among Canadians that American judges are elected and therefore dependent on the political affiliations of those who appointed them, this is not the case for all judges. The judge who listened to Donald Trump declare “not guilty” on Tuesday, Juan Manuel Merchan, was appointed to office – not elected.
Defense strategies
The first thing Donald Trump could do would be to request that his trial be held in a more favorable district, where the jurors would be less hostile to him and not too pro-Democratic. Such a request is difficult, but not impossible, underlines the law professor.
The ex-president could obviously try to drag out the case in court as long as possible, so that the trial does not take place before the presidential election of November 2024.
Professor Mathen would not be surprised to see such a strategy: “Challenging everything is a tactic he has used in the past” in civil lawsuits. Except that in a criminal context, “there are limits to what can be done” to delay proceedings, she warns.
And then, American justice is faster than in Canada, she says. It is not impossible, according to her, that a trial can take less than 18 months, whereas in Canada, the process can take years. Obviously, the verdict could be appealed, and there would then be no final result before the ballot.